Rethinking Age-Related Expectations in Mathematics
Have you ever heard phrases like, “x is working below age-related expectations” or “x is working at a Year 3 level, despite being in Year 5”? These expressions are commonplace in schools, but they often oversimplify the complex reality of pupils’ mathematical understanding. In this post, we’ll take a closer look at what age-related expectations really mean and explore how we can better assess and support pupils’ progress.
The Challenge of Age-Related Expectations
Schools often use terms like “below age-related expectations,” “at age-related expectations,” and “greater depth” to describe pupils’ attainment. While these categories are helpful in some ways, they still echo the outdated “top, middle, bottom” differentiation model—an approach that many educators are working to move away from.
The truth is, defining what “below,” “at,” or “above” expectations means is not as straightforward as it seems. These labels may not accurately reflect a pupil’s true mathematical understanding. Without greater precision, we risk supporting pupils in ways that don’t align with their specific needs.
The Problem with Gap-Filling
One common approach to addressing gaps in knowledge is to focus on “filling gaps.” This assumes that teachers can simply pour missing information into a pupil’s mind, but this perspective misses the mark. Mathematics isn’t just a collection of facts to memorize—it’s a human construction that’s evolved over thousands of years. Pupils need opportunities to make sense of maths for themselves, not just “fill in the blanks.”
Instead of thinking about gaps, we need to consider where pupils are now and how we can build on their current understanding. This shift in perspective is key to helping pupils develop a deeper, more connected understanding of mathematics.
Focusing on What Matters: Ready to Progress Criteria
If we define age-related expectations as keeping up with the Year X curriculum, it’s essential that pupils demonstrate security in the key concepts for their year group. This is where the Department for Education’s (DfE) Ready to Progress (RtP) Criteria (2020) come into play. These criteria highlight the critical areas of the mathematics curriculum that have the greatest impact on pupils’ future understanding.
In a curriculum as broad as mathematics, it’s impossible to assess everything. By focusing on the RtP criteria, we can prioritize the concepts that matter most. The question is: how do we ensure that every pupil is secure in these critical areas? And how do traditional end-of-block or end-of-term assessments help us find building blocks in understanding?
The reality is that such assessments provide only part of the picture. They may indicate general trends, but they don’t guarantee that a pupil has mastered each individual RtP criterion.
Addressing the Root Causes
It’s rare for pupils to suddenly struggle in Year 4 if they’ve been secure in their understanding from EYFS through Year 3. Often, problems originate from a deficit of prior foundational knowledge. For example, a lack of secure knowledge of numbers within 10 or limited spatial reasoning experiences can prevent pupils from making connections with later mathematical concepts.
If we focus on securing pupils’ understanding of the RtP criteria each year, we can move away from generic conversations like “working at the level of Year X.” Instead, we can adopt a more tailored approach, tracking pupils’ understanding in a way that directly informs teaching and intervention.
Introducing Square-i
This is where Square-i comes in. Square-i is an assessment system designed to track the Ready to Progress criteria for every pupil, every year. It paints a clear picture of a pupil’s mathematical understanding and highlights the next steps they need to take. By using Square-i, we can support teaching for mastery principles with a more precise, data-driven approach to assessment.
We’re excited about the potential of this system to transform how schools assess and support pupils in mathematics. By focusing on the right areas and moving beyond outdated models, we can help every pupil build a strong mathematical foundation.
Final Thoughts
Rethinking how we approach age-related expectations is crucial if we want to help pupils succeed in mathematics. By focusing on the Ready to Progress criteria and adopting tools like Square-i, we can provide more effective support and move closer to the principles of teaching for mastery.
If you’d like to learn more about how Square-i can support your school’s assessment practices, visit our website or contact us to schedule a demo. Together, we can make a difference in how we assess and support pupils in their mathematical journey.
Thanks for reading,
Joe and Adam
